Should Trump have been impeached? (1 Viewer)

[Jon]

@Jon , I will have to respectfully disagree with you on that. It was hard to find evidence, but I think based on the fact(?) that Russian did interfere greatly in the election, and it greatly benefitted Trump, and based on the type of statements he made (kind of defiant and bold), then coming to the conclusion that we can assume he had something to do with it isn't at all an unreasonable assumption. We get that there was very little hard evidence found, but people can come up with their own conclusions based on all things considered and the way he acted and talked about the whole thing in combination with the circumstances. I will grant you that there wasn't really an evidentiary conclusion so to speak. That doesn't mean there was none, just none hard fast could be found, but people connect dots..
I will grant Trump that he is good at implying things without directly saying them, (or saying "other people are saying", etc. etc., ) in order to distance himself from the direct statement.

It would be like if I were the mayor and my cousin got a lucrative contract and people accused me of some sort of improper channeling, and I said "No, I didn't do it. But I'd be totally cool doing it!" and such things like that, I'm kind of setting myself up for being harshly judged.

There is nothing wrong with respectful disagreement, because now its my turn!

If we live in a society where we assume guilt without evidence, that is not the kind of society I want to live in. If a party in power that you disliked did something that benefited you, due to a change in the tax law or some other benefit, do we assume that you indeed colluded with that government? I think not. Two years of investigations with countless interviews, subpeanos and so on. No collusion. A team of 17 lawyers who hated Trump couldn't find any collusion. He was clean.

Yet, in the backdrop of all this, we do find that FBI ages were corrupt to the core, spying on Trump and his campaign, Comey leaking information and lawyers altering the evidence 180 degrees, with all "errors" in favour of getting a fisa warrant to spy on the Trump campaign. The whole think stinks.

The only dots out there are fictitious ones that the likes of CNN have perpetrated for their own political purposes. They should be ashamed of themselves for slurring the innocent.

To be honest, I can't believe people are still saying they believed Trump colluded with Russia. How many investigations have there been on this now? Let the facts decide guilt, not political preferences or personal hatred for the man. Do you realise how dangerous that is to take that attitude? The slurring of the innocent is not something I commend.

As for Hillary, exonerated by the Trump hating Comey, stinks to high heaven. There was plenty of evidence for her criminality, but she destroyed half of it, taking hammers to ipads, erasing 30K emails and so on. And the FBI also allowed laptops to be destroyed. She lied to congress innumerable times, had her husband speaking to the head of the DOJ days before her hearing, said she thought "C" at the top of documents was an alphabetical marker rather than representing "Classified", despite being in the government for 20 years...I could go on and on. But wait, she is innocent! Thanks Trump hating Comey!

 

[moke123]

I was responding to steves assertion

Steve R. said:

But the reason for my response is the incessant and unproven assertion that Russia was attempting to help Trump.

the senate (republican led) intel report states otherwise

https://www.politico.com/news/2020/...rms-russia-aimed-to-help-trump-in-2016-198171

 

[Jon]

Crossover of posts, as we all work each other up into a lather.

 

[Isaac]

If we live in a society where we assume guilt without evidence, that is not the kind of society I want to live in. If a party in power that you disliked did something that benefited you, due to a change in the tax law or some other benefit, do we assume that you indeed colluded with that government? I think not. Two years of investigations with countless interviews, subpeanos and so on. No collusion. A team of 17 lawyers who hated Trump couldn't find any collusion. He was clean.

Yet, in the backdrop of all this, we do find that FBI ages were corrupt to the core, spying on Trump and his campaign, Comey leaking information and lawyers altering the evidence 180 degrees, with all "errors" in favour of getting a fisa warrant to spy on the Trump campaign. The whole think stinks.

The only dots out there are fictitious ones that the likes of CNN have perpetrated for their own political purposes. They should be ashamed of themselves for slurring the innocent.

To be honest, I can't believe people are still saying they believed Trump colluded with Russia. How many investigations have there been on this now? Let the facts decide guilt, not political preferences or personal hatred for the man. Do you realise how dangerous that is to take that attitude? The slurring of the innocent is not something I commend.

As for Hillary, exonerated by the Trump hating Comey, stinks to high heaven. There was plenty of evidence for her criminality, but she destroyed half of it, taking hammers to ipads, erasing 30K emails and so on. And the FBI also allowed laptops to be destroyed. She lied to congress innumerable times, had her husband speaking to the head of the DOJ days before her hearing, said she thought "C" at the top of documents was an alphabetical marker rather than representing "Classified", despite being in the government for 20 years...I could go on and on. But wait, she is innocent! Thanks Trump hating Comey!

A few things I do agree with you on.

• Hilary is corrupt (though this has naught to do with Trump)
• FBI did some awful things
• FISA warrants were terrible
• the whole thing stinks!

I think they found a lot but couldn't quite pin it on him..too much circumstantial and not hard fast. Let's face it, everyone does the same thing as I'm doing with certain criminal cases. Some cases are famous in that the person gets off the hook, but many people will still be of the opinion that they were guilty. One thought is how Trump relentlessly and using some questionable tactics, prevented dozens if not hundreds of people from testifying. Not something you usually do if you're innocent. But you're right, nothing could be effectively pinned on him. I guess we all have to draw our own conclusions.

Interestingly, maybe, I have always leaned more toward Republicans and generally support their way of looking at life, the world, the government and the people. I am in favor of plenty of policies of the Trump administration broadly speaking. I like what the Dept of Education has done recently, I like a number of his policies on business and regulation, etc.

It's just a mixed bag with politics.

 

[Jon]

What about prison reform?

 

[Isaac]

What about prison reform?

I'm uninformed on what Trump's position on that is. Especially since Prison Reform means different things to different people. Ranging from wanting everyone in prison to everyone out of prison and in between

Regardless of T., my view is that there are TONS of people in prison who shouldn't be. But probably, a lot who aren't who should be too. What a complicated & troubling situation, now that I think about it! I guess here is where I might show my 'liberal' side: On this issue I feel that the only moral thing to do is to err on the side of less punishment. Since to over-punish people is just so wrong. I guess you could say I am more Democrat on this issue if I had to choose.
What about you?

 

[Jon]

I find the plea bargaining process in the US to be a bit iffy. It probably saves lots of money and time, but I think the outcome can be terrible. Just look at what has happened to General Flynn for a start.

Trumps idea on prison reform is to try to stop the revolving door. Too many people go into prison, only to come out again, get caught for reoffending and then are straight back in. So, I believe his ideas are along the forms of rehabilitation and help to integrate them back into society when they come out. Help them find somewhere to live, get a job and become a productive citizen who contributes. I think that is a commendable goal.

 

[Isaac]

Yes, plea bargaining disturbs me in the sense that the person is obviously pleading guilty not in an authentic way, but only as the best deal they can get and they "have" to to save themselves. But then people go back and point the finger and say Hey, this guy pleaded guilty! Like as if that is a sure mark, despite knowing how the process really works. I can only begin to imagine the domestic violence charges where both people were fighting with each other and the man (of course) bears 100% of the legal consequences of it ... eventually leading, no doubt, to some guilty plea to save his behind. Then for the rest of his life people say "this guy PLEAD GUILTY to such and such"..seems like a pretty raw deal.
Agree about G Flynn.
About Trump and the 'too many people'...that definitely sounds like a commendable goal! I would add to that there are simply too many people in prison who shouldn't be, I've read so many stories about people spending decades behind bars since they were practically a kid, just for some ridiculous possession of drugs charge - turns my stomach to imagine that torture being applied to someone in such an enormous quantity. Add to that the privatization of prisons...I mean how we decide to keep people in prison being influenced by profit...that's very sad and incredibly unfair.

Certainly a lot of work to be done on this issue.

 

[Jon]

I agree with lots of what you say there. I've watched lots of true story movies about black men being imprisoned due to either a bad choice in plea bargaining, where they had inadequate or lazy representation, or they were framed.

 

[Steve R.]

I agree with lots of what you say there. I've watched lots of true story movies about black men being imprisoned due to either a bad choice in plea bargaining, where they had inadequate or lazy representation, or they were framed.

A very opportune comment. Greg Gutfeld (Fox News), made the observation that General Flynn, were he a poor person of color, would have had every civil rights organization demanding from the judge the immediate dismissal of all charges.

 

[Isaac]

A very opportune comment. Greg Gutfeld (Fox News), made the observation that General Flynn, were he a poor person of color, would have had every civil rights organization demanding from the judge the immediate dismissal of all charges.

That may be true, but only in the recent modern day. A reaction to many years of over-incarceration.

 

[moke123]

I've read so many stories about people spending decades behind bars since they were practically a kid, just for some ridiculous possession of drugs charge

How would you like to be that guy finally getting out of prison only to find out that what he did is now legal?

 

[Isaac]

Exactly!

 

[The_Doc_Man]

Trump is a business man. Prisons are like corporate pensions that you can't get rid of. They are cost centers. All cost, little profit. He wants prisons and prison populations reduced so that the folks inside can become taxpayers. Can't fault that, since the implication is that the former prisoner has a job and is at least trying to earn a living rather than steal a living. If you get someone out of prison, you don't have to pay thousands of dollars a year to support that person. Welfare or education programs are cheaper.

A side effect of Trump's effort is that he has gained some support among the black community because of the disproportionate black population in prisons. If he can get a lot of folks out of prison, he'll get a lot of black folks out of prison (strictly on percentage of population) and that will erode Democratic support in lots of ways because the black community was often a Democrat stronghold.